Breastfeeding after breast cancer in young <i>BRCA</i> carriers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We investigated safety of breastfeeding after breast cancer in patients carrying germline BRCA pathogenic or likely pathogenic variants. METHODS: This was an international, multicenter, hospital-based, retrospective cohort study including BRCA carriers diagnosed with stage I-III invasive breast cancer at age 40 years or younger between January 2000 and December 2020 (NCT03673306). Locoregional recurrences and/or contralateral breast cancers, disease-free survival (DFS), and overall survival (OS) were compared between patients who breastfed after delivery and those who did not. RESULTS: Among 4732 patients included from 78 centers worldwide, 659 had a pregnancy after breast cancer diagnosis, of whom 474 delivered a child. After excluding patients with uptake of bilateral risk-reducing mastectomy prior to delivery (n = 225) or unknown breastfeeding status (n = 71), 110 (61.8%) breastfed (median duration 5 months) and 68 (38.2%) did not breastfeed. Compared to patients in the no breastfeeding group, those who breastfed were more frequently nulliparous at breast cancer diagnosis (61.8% vs 45.6%) and did not report prior smoking habit (71.8% vs 57.4%). After a median follow-up of 7.0 years following delivery, 7-year cumulative incidence of locoregional recurrences and/or contralateral breast cancers was 29% in the breastfeeding group and 36% in the no breastfeeding group (adjusted subdistribution hazard ratio [HR] = 1.08, 95% CI = 0.57 to 2.06). No difference in DFS (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] = 0.83, 95% CI = 0.49 to 1.41) nor in OS (aHR = 1.32, 95% CI = 0.31 to 5.66) was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Breastfeeding did not appear to be associated with a higher risk of developing locoregional recurrences or contralateral breast cancers, emphasizing the possibility of achieving a balance between maternal and infant needs without compromising oncological safety.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".